Victor Mignogna v. Funimation Productions, LLC, et al. (2019) - Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.

[That one other guy]

All that really means is that if there's a protective order, it should be on both sides, just as Ty offered. I don't see why he's whining about Nick doing anything at all if he thinks it's completely okay for him to do the same.

It may well be from his clients orders to keep the Protective order away from Vic. And above all else he has to uphold their "interests" in this matter. Or do as they request of him at least. And if his strategy is in fact to depose Vic and move immediately into the TCPA then he is still trying to get on track with this motion as I read it at least. Not to mention trying to stick it to Ty by recommending sanctions which I thought was kind of funny. Will have to see how that is ruled or if its even brought up in court.
And its ironic that he mentioned that while not rule is in place attorneys usually agree to let the person who gave notice of deposition to go first, it's also customary to allow for PO's or a confidentiality agreement when requested.

Edit: and they are trying to keep Vic from his protective order not give it to all sides. Which is why Nick was brought in as proof that Vic is going to bring all the information public.

 

[AnOminous]

Edit: and they are trying to keep Vic from his protective order not give it to all sides. Which is why Nick was brought in as proof that Vic is going to bring all the information public.

And he has no reason not to do that nor any obligation not to do that. If the other side doesn't like it they could cut a deal on the issue, but apparently, they're hell bent on opposing that, so tough titty I guess.

 

[RodgerDodger]

Casey’s filings make my head hurt. I mean he really is putting forth as a point of his claim that Ty Beard “clearly heard Casey say that HE would go first!” So there! It came from a lawyer so it must be law!

I honestly don’t think this will take BHBH days to draft a response to. Why do you need a protective order? Present defendants ongoing public twitter diarrhea since date of service. “Your honor the nonstop defamation of my client has not halted even with the onset of litigation. We have ample evidence that priviledged information has been publicly and incessantly leaked by these named defendants for purposes of denying the plaintiff work and ongo8ng career.”

I’m also not sure how linking to Nick’s YouTube channel, which is very clearly an informational publication about legal cases of interest to the nerdier denizens of the Internet helps his claims? He’s showing that Nick is eff3ctively a journalist? And Ty has publicly given statements or interviews. This would seem to be heading into a pointless and confusing direction that runs smack into the first amendment.

 

[Slimy Time]

Casey’s filings make my head hurt. I mean he really is putting forth as a point of his claim that Ty Beard “clearly heard Casey say that HE would go first!” So there! It came from a lawyer so it must be law!

I honestly don’t think this will take BHBH days to draft a response to. Why do you need a protective order? Present defendants ongoing public twitter diarrhea since date of service. “Your honor the nonstop defamation of my client has not halted even with the onset of litigation. We have ample evidence that priviledged information has been publicly and incessantly leaked by these named defendants for purposes of denying the plaintiff work and ongo8ng career.”

I’m also not sure how linking to Nick’s YouTube channel, which is very clearly an informational publication about legal cases of interest to the nerdier denizens of the Internet helps his claims? He’s showing that Nick is eff3ctively a journalist? And Ty has publicly given statements or interviews. This would seem to be heading into a pointless and confusing direction that runs smack into the first amendment.

Does this nigger have to put RESPONSE TO MOTION TO QUASH AND FOR ENTRY OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND PROTECTIVE ORDERS AND MOTION TO COMPEL at the bottom of every fucking page? I don't recall Ty putting this obnoxious "fuck off" line and font at the bottom of every numbered page.
Edit: Because he didn't. He put it in a nice, crisp off to the side font. Casey makes his papers look like as much of a mess as they are.

 

[AnCapFool]

Another lawyer on Nick's discord also said this: "Also, spending several paragraphs talking about how discovery shouldn't be able to be avoided when clearly what is being asked for is an order regarding disclosure, not an order to prevent certain material from being discoverable, is disingenuous straw manning at best and blatant incompetence at worst. "

 

[5t3n0g0ph3r]

Another lawyer on Nick's discord also said this: "Also, spending several paragraphs talking about how discovery shouldn't be able to be avoided when clearly what is being asked for is an order regarding disclosure, not an order to prevent certain material from being discoverable, is disingenuous straw manning at best and blatant incompetence at worst. "

So, what are saying is that they are stupid, right?

 

[AnOminous]

I just checked the rules and FRCP 21 requires papers like this be filed "no fewer than three days" before the hearing for which they're scheduled, so it's legit, although I think it's essentially introducing a new motion and Ty could demand time to respond and schedule a second motion hearing if they really want this to be heard.

It's an interesting gamble by Erick, because generally, the loser of a motion to compel can be ordered to pay the attorney fees for the other side.

It seems pretty ballsy to gamble on winning one of these based on a one day delay when a hearing was scheduled within 24 hours of the refused deposition, which was based on actual legal reasoning unlike the nonsense initially filed by Erick.

I'll also note it's not just the losing party who has to pay. The judge can assess it directly against the counsel who advised the motion. So Erick could personally end up in the hole before the case even starts.

 

[5t3n0g0ph3r]

I just checked the rules and FRCP 21 requires papers like this be filed "no fewer than three days" before the hearing for which they're scheduled, so it's legit, although I think it's essentially introducing a new motion and Ty could demand time to respond and schedule a second motion hearing if they really want this to be heard.

It's an interesting gamble by Erick, because generally, the loser of a motion to compel can be ordered to pay the attorney fees for the other side.

View attachment 777457

It seems pretty ballsy to gamble on winning one of these based on a one day delay when a hearing was scheduled within 24 hours of the refused deposition, which was based on actual legal reasoning unlike the nonsense initially filed by Erick.

I'll also note it's not just the losing party who has to pay. The judge can assess it directly against the counsel who advised the motion. So Erick could personally end up in the hole before the case even starts.

The question remains if The Beard prepared for this or not and has a response to Erick's motion.

 

[repentance]

The question remains if The Beard prepared for this or not and has a response to Erick's motion.

He's responded to Casey's shit lightning fast before. They'll be ready for this even if it means pulling all-nighters.

 

[Slab Bulkhead]

He's responded to Casey's shit lightning fast before. They'll be ready for this even if it means pulling all-nighters.

They basically have all day tomorrow to come up with something between him and the amazons. I'm pretty certain he's been made aware of it already by now so is likely formulating a response.

 

[AnOminous]

The question remains if The Beard prepared for this or not and has a response to Erick's motion.

I think he should ask for more time to respond, like more time until after the TCPA deadline.

He's responded to Casey's shit lightning fast before. They'll be ready for this even if it means pulling all-nighters.

And be prepared to respond to it as well.

 

[RodgerDodger]

I think he should ask for more time to respond, like more time until after the TCPA deadline.

Oh that would be deliciously evil. And extra time to respond to your own last minute frivilous filing would not actually constitute "Valid Cause" now would it? Someone remind me when is the 60 day timer up on the TCPA filing?

 

[wickedlilium]

I think he should ask for more time to respond, like more time until after the TCPA deadline.

I can see that but considering how Ty thinks this case is essentially pointless I also doubt he'd want to drag the case on longer then needed.
So if the TCPA deadline is withing a few days or weeks he might wait it out with another hearing or try and get the judge to prevent a TCPA considering Ty wanted an agreement to hold off on it until after defendants deposition is filed. Either way I doubt Casey will be getting a TCPA before filed and in motion before the defendants deposition considering how exceptional he is.

 

[repentance]

Oh that would be deliciously evil. And extra time to respond to your own last minute frivilous filing would not actually constitute "Valid Cause" now would it? Someone remind me when is the 60 day timer up on the TCPA filing?

Lawsuit was filed on 18 April and I'm pretty sure Casey accepted service either that day or the next. That means the 60 days would be up at the beginning of the third week of June (around the 17th, I think).

 

[RodgerDodger]

Lawsuit was filed on 18 April and I'm pretty sure Casey accepted service either that day or the next. That means the 60 days would be up at the beginning of the third week of June (around the 17th, I think).

So same day Marchi has to respond. That should be entertaining.

 

[AnOminous]

I can see that but considering how Ty thinks this case is essentially pointless I also doubt he'd want to drag the case on longer then needed.

That's the point. Force them to get out the TCPA. Now.

 

[wickedlilium]

That's the point. Force them to get out the TCPA. Now.

Would their reply's on twitter stating they don't fear going to court, them having all the "evidence" they needed, and w/e else help push a prevention towards the TCPA from a judge?

 

[Immortal Technique]

I just checked the rules and FRCP 21 requires papers like this be filed "no fewer than three days" before the hearing for which they're scheduled

Just a question within the lawyer technicalities of "no fewer than three days." Is it 3 full business days or is based on the filed date? As in, Classy Casey filed that 'Motion To Quash' at the end the day (7:49pm to be exact) on the 28th, for a hearing on the 31st at 11:30am....that's just 64 hours and basically negates a whole day of work that can be done by Ty's firm.

 

[AnOminous]

Would their reply's on twitter stating they don't fear going to court, them having all the "evidence" they needed, and w/e else help push a prevention towards the TCPA from a judge?

No. It's not remotely relevant to whether the case is frivolous on its face (which it is not).

Just a question within the lawyer technicalities of "no fewer than three days." Is it 3 full business days or is based on the filed date? As in, Classy Casey filed that 'Motion To Quash' at the end the day (7:49pm to be exact) on the 28th, for a hearing on the 31st at 11:30am....that's just 64 hours and basically negates a whole day of work that can be done by Ty's firm.

It's actually supposed to be served, and served on all parties, three days before.

This is what the Certificate of Service says:

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on May 28, 2019, a true and correct copy of Defendant's Response to Motion to Quash and for Entry of Confidentiality and Protective Orders and Motion to Compel was served on Mr. Ty Beard electronically through the electronic filing manager.

Generally, service by electronic means is completed when it occurs, but service completed after 5:00 p.m. is treated as occurring on the following day.

The Motion to Compel isn't a responsive pleading to Ty's filing, it's an entirely new motion. So it should have been served "no less than three days" prior to the hearing on the 31st, not merely two days.

So we have Casey playing fast and loose with the rules again.

 

[wickedlilium]

No. It's not remotely relevant to whether the case is frivolous on its face (which it is not).

wasn't talking about the case, was just seeing if their statements would affect the TCPA. Considering this trial is with regards to deposition and Ty clearly stating he didn't want the TCPA and TCPA can delay a trial for up to 90 days I was just assuming their conflicting statements might affect how the judge rules on the deposition with regards to TCPA at least.